I struggled to follow the emulsion, exposure methods, and chemicals mentioned in the first half of the reading. However, I like the comparison this reading made between Raman spectrograms and photogrammetry. Both of them use photography to measure. While the Raman images generate very specific information, photogrammetric images contain mathematical information and visuals. I also like the article’s mention of Documentation vs. Measurement: while most photogrammetric images are discarded once the mathematical information is harvested, the few images with accidental pictorial details are preserved.
I was also inspired by how this reading looks at the slow-down effects of photography: motion can be recombined as a moving image, but the trend was to see motions as a series of individual discrete moments strung together.
As for an artistic opportunity, I lately tried a Polaroid emulsion lift, and I was thrilled about the texture of possibilities of it. I want to explore the relationship between emulsions and images, though I am unsure if this is a methodological/scientific/scientistic approach to imaging. To be more specific, I am thinking about printing images that would be otherwise impossible to appear on Polaroid films (such as my drawing, a screenshot of my computer, an image of a scene created with Unity, etc.)— and then extracting the emulsion and transferring it onto surfaces other than films or papers. I appreciate the soft texture and the uncontrollable nature of emulsions: they blur the restriction of the rectangular frame and create unexpected patterns by overlapping themselves. I’m also excited about transferring the emulsions onto different surfaces: I wonder what it could possibly mean through transferring images with certain content onto wood, iron, cotton, or other special mediums.